Abstract This paper examines mothers and mothering in the Pāli canon and commentaries and contends that a mothering path emerges when the deeply patriarchal traditional hierarchy of values is challenged and, following Karen Derris, the unthoughts related to mothers and mothering, which this hierarchy of values generates, are also challenged. The article focuses on three main female characters, Māyā, Mahāpajāpatī, and Visākhā, whose paths as mothers or as lay followers of the Buddha who “stand in the position of a mother” constitute a deliberate soteriological path in the Pali Buddhist texts. It draws on contemporary Buddhist Studies feminist scholarship (in particular, the work of Karen Derris (2014) and Liz Wilson (2013)) as well as motherhood studies (in particular, Sara Ruddick’s (1989) work based on Adrienne Rich’s (1976) foundational distinction between motherhood as a patriarchal institution that oppresses women and mothering as women’s lived experience to outline how mothering activities in the Pāli canon can be discerned as a soteriological path that follows the same trajectory as the Buddha’s Bodhisatta path that begins with making a solemn vow (patthanā) and ends with awakening (nibbāna). I conclude that adopting this approach allows us to reenvisage activities and relationships usually understood as “this-worldly” in the canonical and commentarial Pāli texts, and in contemporary feminist scholarship, as the embodiment of a soteriology based on interdependence and compassionate care for others.

中文翻译：

---

“像母亲一样，是她的独生子”：在帕利佳能教书

摘要本文研究了巴利教规中的母亲和母亲，并进行了评论，并认为，当父权制的传统价值体系受到深深的挑战时，母亲的养育路径就出现了；继卡伦·德里斯（Karen Derris）之后，这种与母亲和母亲有关的思想也由此产生，也受到挑战。本文重点介绍三个主要女性角色，Māyā，Mahāpajāpatī和Visākhā，其作为母亲或作为“站在母亲的位置”的佛陀信徒的道路构成了巴利佛教文本中刻意的社会学路径。它借鉴了当代佛教研究的女权主义奖学金（特别是Karen Derris（2014）和Liz Wilson（2013）的著作）​​以及母性研究（特别是 莎拉·鲁迪克（Sara Ruddick，1989）的工作基于阿德里安娜·里奇（Adrienne Rich，1976）的基本区别，即作为压迫妇女的父权制的母亲与作为妇女的生活经验的母亲之间的区别，概述了如何辨别巴利经典中的母亲活动是一条遵循同样路径的社会学路径。轨迹是佛陀的菩萨道，始于庄严的誓言（patthanā），最后是觉醒（nibbāna）。我的结论是，采用这种方法可以使我们重新构想规范和评论性的巴利文本以及当代女性主义学术界通常被理解为“世俗”的活动和关系，以此作为基于相互依存和同情关怀他人的社会学的体现。